The atrocity demands a response, but will the President favour international diplomacy or military action?
Reports this morning suggest conflict within the Government and hesitation in America. And no wonder.
Public opinion would back missile strikes against Assad, and arming a credible opposition, were there to be one. But not more western boots on the ground.
We are so preoccupied with Brexit and Putin that we may have missed the significance of the President’s latest sacking-and-replacement.
They offer the best chance to maintain influence in Syria to counter Moscow, but the question of their ongoing conflict with Turkey must be addressed.
The Saudi crown prince is in a hurry on every front – if anyone is advising him to take care, then he is certainly not listening to them.
Many have already described why he is unfit for the job. Indeed, many have tried to remove him. Their support now is a joke, a delusion, a denial of reality.
To advocate regime change without a plan for the future would be criminally negligent. What we can do is to influence, support and invest in the people of Syria.
One virtue of democracy is that it does not give special prominence to the loudest people in judging the mood of a crowd.
Action must go beyond ISIS to prevent other, similarly-minded, jihadist groups prospering.
Parliament’s job should be to hold the Prime Minister and Executive to account for what they have to do, rather than becoming a party to it.